02-10-2015, 02:38 PM
(02-09-2015, 10:28 PM)Bring4th_Plenum Wrote: I think of the Law of One as a philosophy, first and foremost. That, of course, doesn't prevent people from turning it into dogma, as is the case with almost anything that one forms an emotional attachment to.
I think what inherently sets this philosophy apart, and that is also a safeguard, is that the First Distortion is referenced as the Law of Free Will.
If the Free Will of the self is recognised in oneself, then it can be recognised in others, and then we get to the situation where co-operation, dialogue, and freedom of expression can be the means of interaction; rather than a system of rules which apply to everyone, no matter the circumstances.
I've met Jim and Carla in person, and they are great people. But I don't inherently see them as being any different from you or I.
Agreed! The reason I started this discussion is that I've been observing a rather disconcerting trend in some of the discussions, wherein people sometimes state "Ra said xyz therefore it is fact" seemingly with no regard of the rest of what Ra said. A single phrase is taken out of context, ignoring myriad other points made by Ra that could flesh out the concept. This is akin to a Christian taking a single bible verse and using it to justify whatever they like...for example, an old testament quote in which the 'god' of the bible commanded his 'chosen few' to invade their neighbors, steal their land and slaughter all their children could be used by an extremist to justify violence and bigotry, while ignoring the teachings of Jesus about love, peace, forgiveness and compassion. I've seen this happen in the religious community numerous times.
An example of such cherry-picking can be found here. For example, "Ra said there is no right or wrong" while ignoring the 2 paths. Or, "Ra said the key is acceptance" while ignoring the importance of free will and choice. Or "Carla does xyz therefore I can too" which isn't fair to Carla, since she has expressly stated that she doesn't wish to be anyone's guru. Or "I am a 6D Wanderer so I don't need to have compassion...that is a 4D trait" which seems to be missing the point about why we're here in the first place.
In all these cases, it seems to be a matter of picking a single point alone, while ignoring the bigger picture...similar to the religious person who creates an entire doctrine based on that single scripture. There are literally thousands of variations just in the Christian religion alone...all because of slight differences in interpretation. The mainstream Christian religions all agree that only those who have been 'saved' by believing in Jesus will go to 'heaven' and families have been torn apart by this single belief, political decisions have been made, wars have been fought...this is the power of religious dogma.
I contend that no beliefs are completely immune, not even the Law of One, unfortunately. Perhaps the reason is that some people are simply trading their Christian dogma for Law of One dogma. I see the shimmering of religious, dogmatic thinking bleeding into Law of One discussions. I'm wondering if anyone else has noticed this?